SouthNYfan

Except he was hot garbage prior to this year's Cinderella story. My money is on him returning to the dumpster after this year, unless he stays in Minnesota with a top tier defense and running game. Even then I'll bet he turns into "average at best".

This. Bridgewater's injury was literally one of the worst you could ever have in regards to an orthopedic knee injury. 40% of the time this injury is severely unstable and chronically painful. He's lucky he didn't need his leg amputated. There is no way I'd bet my team's future on him, unless I was looking for a high stakes gamble. Look, it turned out great for the saints and betting on Brees, but be also played a solid season in SD before being replaced by Rivers. Brees had a torn labrum though, which is like a hangnail compared to Teddy's injury.

Right. He's not great. He's good. That's my point. He is going to be 34 when the season starts. He doesn't have 5-6 good years left. Every single QB who you are using as a comparison for guys still maintaining a high level past 35 and towards 40 (Brees and Brady) or the ones still performing around 35 (Rivers and Ben) are all head and shoulders above Smith. 3 of them are hall of fame locks. Rivers might wind up there one day. Ben it's on the verge of retirement, regardless of his stats. They are also so pocket QBs, Smith loses his mobility he's probably done for. Those guys are all great, so you can risk keeping them because even with a decline they are still good to very good. Smith starting at "good" leaves little margin for decline while still being effective. If Smith is cheap and DOESN'T hinder our plan for getting a young QB I'm good with him for 1-3 years. I'm not okay with him being our 5 year plan.

Brady and Brees were never mobile QBs, they were always pocket QBs. Cunningham also wasn't very good once he got to age 30, and was hot garbage when he became a pocket passer. Other than one statistical anomaly in Minnesota when he was throwing to RANDY MOSS and CHRIS CARTER. You know, two of the top WRs in NFL history. Brady, Brees, Rivers are all pocket passers. Ben has been for quite a while, and was never really a runner. They aren't the same type of QB. Smith would be a solid QB as a bridge, for 1-3 years max. There's a reason teams keep getting rid of Smith. He's not that great.

Really? At LEAST 5-6 good years? So that's high level until he's 38-39 years old. On a guy who needs his mobility/agility? When that falls off, so will he, dramatically. Oh, let's not forget he's been tossed from two teams now. I'm not sure what all the love for him is.

Just Google "tibial dislocation x-ray" Then tell me you trust your season in that knee. I'm not a Tyrod fan, like at all, and I'd rather him over tb.

So two statistical anomalies Also two of the top 10 all time greats One of whom many consider the GOAT Even if they have statistical falloff with aging, they would still be upper tier. Smith isn't even in the same universe as these two. Smith also relies on legs and athleticism to move around the pocket. The natural decline in athleticism with aging would be worse on him.

Teddy was his left (front) knee Not his power leg Front knee injuries typically cause a drop in accuracy in terms of sailing a ball more often due to instability on that leg, most often with a collateral ligament (see: Cutler trying to play with a grade 2 MCL in that one playoff game) Bridgewater is a complete wildcard though. He took an entire year+ off. He also had a tibial-femoral dislocation +ACL. That is literally one of the worst knee injuries (the dislocation, not the ACL). He could be perfect, or his leg could collapse like wet tissue paper. Compete unknown.

I agree with your last sentiment here. I like our wr core. I think they are solid but not spectacular. What they do lack, as you said, is the ability to make those "high degree of difficulty" catches, and instead they make up for it with being solid and reliable route runners with solid hands on well thrown balls. Im not sure what we'd need for a QB to fit with this core, but I think trying to add a playmaking "circus" receiver would be a good idea to flesh out the corps.

Very well said. Smith is towards the end of his career, Bradford was not, so even with his injuries, he was like 28-29 years old, Smith is going on 34 before the season starts. That's a big agree Gap, and must be taken into account. In regards to bortles, even if they lose but he plays well, it'll be hard to justify letting him go, even though I'm not sure he's made "the leap" because I'm pretty sure this season is an anomaly for him overall. Kinda like back with Brady-bledsoe though. (Granted Brady won the Superbowl, but let's not forget bledsoe won a playoff game that year for them) They traded Drew because they couldn't justify not keeping Brady as the starter, even though if you look back, Brady's season wasn't that great overall other than the record and the Superbowl (obv important lol)

Actually teams do this. Just like when a defense double teams a receiver all game, forcing the QB to throw elsewhere. Sometimes, that #2 receiver has a career day and you lose. The problem with what the Steelers did was they went all in to stop fourt, leaving bortles free reign, and fourt still ran ran over them, and Blake had one of his sporadic "good days" Oh and they gave them good field position many times. That too. Mind boggling, right?

Never gonna know with him unfortunately. His knee injury robbed him of not only his mobility, but he lost significant velocity. If you know throwing mechanics, you'll know that you need a stable base to throw from, driving with your rear leg, generating power that drives through your core and into your upper body, translating into velocity on your throw. His yards per attempt dropped significantly. His ints increased. Losing that much power/velocity could easily affect a QB to the point where windows that he used to be able to squeeze a ball into, he no longer can. Fractions of a second can mean the difference between a comp and an int. Not many QBs continue to play on a high level after a push-off knee injury, Rivers came back amazing, McNabb didn't, though he still had a decent career after, his best years were before the injury. Neither of them tore their ACL, LCL, and meniscus like rgiii did. Multi ligament knee injuries are almost always ACL, MCL, and medial meniscus. Rgii was a special case. He tore the LCL partially prior and the Redskins put him in a brace and trotted him out there, limping, against the Seahawks. He wound up with full ACL, LCL, and meniscus tears. His knee was never stable again. LCL injuries of that magnitude are savage. So, going back to what you said, sure it could have been teams adjusted to the mobile QB style, but I will say that the injury had much more of a impact than any defensive adjustments did. He lost velocity, and never adjusted his game to it. Would he have been an all time great? Who knows. Probably not. Would he have had a solid couple more years as a upper tier QB(hopefully injury free)? Almost certainly. After that rookie season you cannot honestly say he would have been a bust.

I will jump on and day yes to RGIII Prior to his injury he was very good He had a promising career derailed after one of the best rookie seasons ever by a QB. Nick foles after his "breakout year" was a huge risk after being subpar in college, subpar his first partial season, so no I wouldn't for him. Ryan Leaf ? Before the draft sure. After watching him in the NFL? Nope. *Also leaf started 2-0 not 4-0. He also looked terrible in those starts.a Should get your stats right before arguing, unless you're counting preseason, in that case, say so."

Except he got over the hump and won a Superbowl. But you know... Let's forget that happened. They are already perennial Superbowl contenders. 2017 : loss to Jax (bad loss. I'm confident saying that the jags run ends this week in foxboro) 2016: loss to pats in conf champ (who won super bowl) 2015: loss to broncos (who won super bowl) 2014: loss to Ravens (that was when Bell tore his MCL week 17. Ben threw 2 picks that game against Baltimore) 2013: (8-8 missed playoffs) 2012: (8-8 missed playoffs) 2011: lost to Denver on the tebow miracle I'm not sure that warrants firing.

Or maybe because he's 2-3 years younger than tyrod so he is just entering his typical "prime" for most athletes Or maybe it's just fool's gold and bortles still sucks and will regress

Oh I know!! Earlier somebody said they would like to see some QBs who had sub60% in college, and translated to better in NFL. My earlier post even said that the game has changed a lot, so it's not really a good example, just an example of sub 60% college who succeeded Favre was the only real anomaly I could find. It was just a statistical fact finding mission, not saying he's the norm I think you're right.

Brett Favre! 52-54% college 64% NFL if I remember right

Really liked your post as a whole. Agreed with it all. I snipped this section out to give an answer. I googled about 3-4 QBs randomly, for college stats, and while, as you pointed out with Kelly, comp% used to be lower, Brett Favre, the eternal gunslinger, fits your bill of sub 60% in college, and had a great pro career. Brett's college comp%? 40.7, 55.8, 54.1, 54.5 A total of 52.4% cumulative. Interesting because he only had I think 4-5 seasons sub 60% in the NFL and two were like 59.8% If there are any others I'd love to know too. I'll look myself. Very interesting research.

Fair. I wasn't the original one saying he was 2x better. I actually forgot that was the initial start of the debate. I will say that I feel Wilson was better his first two years as a starter than tyrod, and showed willingness to throw the ball into tight areas when needed, vs holding the ball and being tentative. I think that Russell being a rookie and sophomore, vs Tyrod who had 5 years as a backup to adjust to NFL playbooks, with film and practices to learn from, should be in Tyrod's favor, but instead Wilson was just flat out better, no not 2x, but better with signs of a higher ceiling. Tyrod, by midway through his second season starting (his 7th in the NFL), had shown very little in terms of progress, with very little thoughts about how high his ceiling would be, and more thoughts of "well. This is what we have. He is what he is. Can we win with this?" Sure. You can win 40%-50% of your games. You can be a fringe playoff team. In the long run that's not good enough. Is tyrod terrible? No. Is he below average? Yep. I don't really dislike the guy, I don't love him either. If he goes somewhere else and thrives, I'll eat my words. I'm willing to assert that he won't be much better anywhere else, if at all.

Or maybe our offense wasn't a snafu this year. McCoy's average dropped because teams don't fear tyrod at all and attack McCoy. Look i can make assumptions too. Touchdowns, yards, yards per attempt, comp%, last I checked, are all "accepted passing statistics" All of which Wilson beat tyrod in. Yep.

For me it's not about instant gratification. It's about performance over a period of time. Sometimes you need more time to evaluate a player (like tyrod, after 2 seasons, I was sure of what he was, which looks to be correct after the third year) Sometimes, you just know right away (ej, losman, Rob Johnson) I'm all for giving Peterman more chances, but I'm not sure enough about him to pass on somebody this year. I was a bledsoe fan, a flutie fan, hell I liked Edwards and gave him a shot, but I'm also realistic. I think a lot of people set expectations too high from the get go, then when somebody doesn't look like the "second coming of Jim Kelly" after the first couple of starts, we automatically call them a bust. I'm rambling. I would love a franchise elite qb. I'll be happy with a very good QB. I'd rather not settle on an average at best QB.

Neither can any Steelers fan.

I went for first 3 seasons as a starter, not two, since you know, Tyrod has been a starter for 3 seasons. Wilson's stats improved slightly each season, which, combined with his get/4q comebacks and crunchtime play, gave his coaches enough confidence to keep letting him throw more. Your can't just say last year was a snafu . Tyrod's numbers declined each season, it's a the season downward trend. That's why there is no faith. When can we use his 5 seasons on the bench in an argument? Garoppolo had three behind Brady, came in ready to rock. Aaron Rodgers rode the bench then came in to start. Tyrod was behind flacco. Obv he's not in favre or Brady's category to learn from, but he isn't trash either. I'm pretty sure I included passing stats, such as TDs and yards, but Wilson had better yards per game, yards average per attempt, better comp% The only metric tyrod won in that I can see was int/int% You obviously won't throw many ints if you won't pull the trigger unless it's a perfect window.

I'm willing to bet this is most accurate.

Well he threw 72td-26int vs Tyrod 51td-16int (tyrod didn't even have 1td per game this season) Wilson also threw for about 330+ more yards a season (or a little over 1000 more over the first three) Wilson's numbers improved each of his first three Tyrod's have regressed each year Wilson had 10 fourth qt comebacks with 15 total game winning drives over first three seasons Tyrod has a total of 3 fourth qt comebacks and 5 game winning drives over his three seasons starting Wilson also was thrown in as a rookie, tyrod had 4 seasons as a backup to learn Comparing their seasons after 6 years in the league (Wilson) vs Tyrod (8 years, 3 starting 5 backup) is even more of a disparity Tyrod threw 14td to 4 int and had 2800 yards Wilson had 34td to 11 int, and had 4000 yards. His 34 td led the NFL (Wentz obviously would have if he didn't get hurt) Their first 3 years as starters, Wilson was flat out better when it mattered, aka touchdowns and 4th quarter play. Tyrod has regressed every year, while Wilson has improved. The two aren't even in the same league.